Despite a significant number of works devoted to the discussion of the phenomenon of "digital economy", there is still no clear understanding of what the digital economy is as a socio-economic system. The transition to a digital economy is not another change in the technological order (option - fourth industrial revolution), but is a change in the paradigm of economic development, entailing changes in the nature of the division of labor, the way economic entities interact and the basis of economic power. The change in the nature of the division of labor is expressed in the separation of intellectual and organizational centers from production and service units. The change in the leading mode of inter-firm interaction is manifested in the gradual displacement of the free market by value networks. Property ceases to be the main basis of economic power, its place is taken by a position in the hierarchy of the field of interaction (firm, market or network).
Information and communication technologies today penetrate into almost all spheres of human life, cyber-physical systems capable of autonomous exchange of information, independent initiation of actions and independent control of operations are becoming more widespread. According to the President of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Klaus Schwab, the nature of the ongoing changes is so fundamental that world history has not yet known such an era - a time of both great opportunities and potential dangers . Today, most researchers do not have a clear understanding of what the digital economy is as a social system, what socio-economic consequences of the ever-deepening technological changes taking place before our eyes can lead to.
1.1. Digital revolution and fundamental changes in economic relations
From a technological point of view, the digital economy is the result of the mutual superposition of fundamental breakthroughs in the development of many branches of intellectual activity, including: the creation of cyber-physical and cyber-biological systems, fundamentally new materials, new means of production, information technology, genetic engineering, renewable energy sources, etc.
The transition to a digital economy is characterized by technological explosions, which are understood as a combination of technologies that make it possible to create new products and services that, on the one hand, create and form new areas of activity, and on the other hand, destroy or radically change existing sectors of the economy.
Technical development is exponential: every year new science-intensive technologies become more and more perfect, and their physical embodiment is getting better (material storage media become smaller and cheaper, and their capacity and speed of information processing increase many times). With regard to the information accumulated in the world, the situation is even more explosive: the time intervals required for a doubling of information are constantly decreasing.
The active development of information and communication technologies (ICT), coupled with the spread of the Internet, led to the emergence of a new concept - Big data (a set of approaches, methods and tools for analyzing huge amounts of structured and unstructured data).
Revolutionary changes in many traditional industries and the simultaneous emergence of new areas and opportunities for the development of human activity make it unrealistic to accurately predict the future, which depends not only on the level of radical technological changes, the speed of their improvement and spread, but also on the institutional support of these processes. At the same time, some significant characteristics of the digital economy can already be identified :
- transformation of ICT into technologies of wide application. Technology of wide application is a technology that allows many improvements, has various use cases, is applicable in many sectors of the economy and can be combined with other technologies, significantly increasing their effectiveness;
- improving the information support of the decision-making process through remote access to information in real time and the creation of systems for processing large amounts of data. This changes the logic of the organization of the management process both at the business level and at the state level;
- increasingly active transition of the population and business to online interaction and online service;
- displacement of human labor by robotic labor. Transfer of a significant part of production to a digital format;
- replacement of a significant part of machine tools with 3D printers for various purposes - for home, industrial, medical, construction and other uses. Computer production of new types of goods, including human organs;
- a decrease in the role of office, production and retail space, the territorial dispersion of participants in economic interaction, from online transactions to intra-company remote interaction;
- reduction of the asymmetry of information by increasing the possibilities of access to it and advanced technologies for its processing;
- the emergence of the internet of things - objects with built-in electronic devices that exchange information about the state of the object of the outside world or the consumer itself without human intervention;
- the emergence of fundamentally new products on the market (unmanned vehicles, energy storage devices);
- the emergence of new, electronic types of money;
- the growing role of sharing goods (consumers do not acquire the goods themselves, but the rights of access to the goods and the rights to use them);
- strengthening of the role of digital platforms in the economy connecting suppliers (sellers) and consumers (buyers);
- gradual displacement of hydrocarbons by renewable energy sources, development of energy-saving technologies;
- implementation of the idea of a "digital city" - integrated informatization of transport, housing and communal services, etc.;
- development of innovative biotechnologies and pharmaceuticals that provide effective rejuvenation and treatment of the body;
- reduction of transaction costs by replacing intermediaries with automatic network services;
- implementation of the e-government concept;
- real globalization of social ties;
- the emergence of a new form of interaction between companies and end consumers through the creation of personalized production chains, which is sometimes referred to as the "economy on demand".
Of course, the listed characteristics are not exhaustive and do not provide an accurate definition of the concept of "digital economy".
The pace of change is so great that it is very difficult to make predictions and try to predict exactly which path the development of technology will take.
The most famous examples of change in recent years are: digital cameras have destroyed film cameras; smartphones have almost replaced push-button mobile phones; the "Uber-revolution" has taken place in the taxi market - the digital platform has not destroyed traditional taxi services, but has radically changed the architecture of the market, sharply increasing competition.
At the moment, many innovations have been developed, the mass distribution of which should lead to radical changes in the markets. However, in order for these inventions to become technologies of wide application, it takes time to reduce the cost of their production and realize a two-way network effect - a significant reduction in costs for producers and an increase in value for consumers at the same time .
The transformation of socio-economic relations associated with the widespread dissemination of information and communication technologies is interpreted differently by different scientific schools. The most common is the technical and technological approach, which explains what is happening as another technological revolution. At the same time, the designations of the stage of technological development may differ: a new (sixth) technological order, a new (fourth) industrial revolution, a new industrialization, etc.
The technical and technological approach is based on the idea that ICT marks the next stage in the development of the production method, the foundations of which were laid during the Great Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution itself usually dates from the second half of the XVIII century. The symbolic countdown is from the opening in 1771 of Arkwright's textile factory in Cromford. The factory is considered the first example of an industrial one - the combination of machine production and water energy into a single system, which made it possible to move from single manual production to mass machine production.
According to the concept of uneven development of scientific and technological progress , the period that can be called the era of industry (originating from the time of the Great Industrial Revolution and continuing to this day) is characterized by a regular change in technological patterns, which are based on technological revolutions that radically change the structure of social production. At the same time, fundamentally new technologies become technologies of wide application not immediately after their appearance, but with some delay .
Adherents of the theory of technological patterns currently distinguish six patterns - "industrial eras". The first begins, in their opinion, along with the industrial revolution in the 1760-70s. This is the era of the use of water energy and the first machines that replaced manual labor. The second way is positioned as the era of steam and railways. Its symbolic beginning is usually dated to 1829 - the testing of the "Rocket" steam locomotive for the Manchester - Liverpool railway. The era of electricity, steel and heavy engineering is the third technological order. Its beginning is timed to coincide with the opening in 1875 of the Carnegie steel plant in Pittsburgh (Pennsylvania). The launch in 1908 of the production of a cheap "Model-T" car (Ford) with an internal combustion engine (Daimler & Benz) is considered to be the symbolic beginning of the fourth technological order (the era of oil and automobiles) - the transfer of the automotive industry to mass production. Finally, the fifth technological order is called the era of microelectronics and computer science and its beginning is associated with the advent of a computer on microchips (1971 - Intel). There has not yet been a consensus on the main content and starting point of the sixth technological order. Some researchers focus on NBIC technologies (Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information, Cognitive Science), others talk about robotics and new energy.
The developers of the concept of technological orders believe that technologies inherent in different technological orders can dominate in different countries at the same time. Moreover, it is possible to simultaneously combine different technological structures in different fields of activity in one country. At the same time, countries lagging behind in terms of technological development have a chance to get ahead when changing technological patterns .
A slightly different point of view in terms of periodization, but not very different in essence, is held by the German technological school, which believes that we are talking about the beginning of the fourth industrial revolution. According to the German tradition, a sequence of industrial revolutions that began in the second half of the XVIII century stands out . According to this approach, the first industrial revolution lasted from the 1760s to the 1840s. Its trigger was the construction of railways and the invention of the steam engine, which contributed to the development of mechanical production. The second industrial revolution, which began at the end of the XIX century and lasted until the beginning of the XX century, led to the emergence of mass production thanks to the spread of electricity and the introduction of the assembly line. The third industrial revolution began in the 1960s. It is usually referred to as the computer or digital revolution, as it was catalyzed by the development of semiconductors, the use of mainframe computers in the sixties of the XX century, personal computers in the seventies and eighties, and the Internet in the nineties .
According to Klaus Schwab, the fourth industrial revolution is characterized by the universal spread of the mobile Internet, the reduction in the size and cost of means of production, artificial intelligence and learning machines, as well as the synthesis of physical, digital and biological innovations. Obviously, here, as in the case of the last and penultimate technological modes, there is a certain intersection of the basic technologies of the third and fourth stages.
A different, alternative technological approach can be called structural-sectoral. These are numerous concepts of the end of an industrial society, starting with the post-industrial society of D. Bell and ending with of E. Toffler's third wave. According to the structural approach, the classification of various types of society is based on such a criterion as the field of activity with the largest share of employees. Accordingly, an agrarian, industrial and post- or superindustrial society is distinguished, a characteristic feature of which is the transfer of most of the activity to the service sector and intellectual (innovative) activity, the transformation of scientific knowledge into an independent factor of production.
Today this point of view is actively criticized. Supporters of the idea of a "new industrial society" pay attention to the fact that the concept of denying the leading role of material production is not confirmed by practice. Material production has not disappeared anywhere - it has simply moved to other countries. Moreover, a powerful wave of industrialization unfolded in the world South and East, which led to a sharp increase in the share of industrial production in the respective regions and, as a result, to an increase in the share of workers and engineers employed in a purely industrial sphere in the world "total worker" . However, the proportion of people employed in one or another type of activity, as well as the type of engine (water, steam, internal combustion, or electric) can hardly be a weighty argument in a dispute about the nature of ongoing processes. Just as the industrial revolution did not eliminate the agricultural sector, but simply significantly reduced its scale in the national economies of countries leading industrialization, so the new wave or new economic revolution (if it takes place) does not imply the withering away of the industrial sector, but a decrease in its role in social production, in particular, a reduction in the share of added value created in this sector.
Another thing is that in itself the transfer of industrial production to the periphery of the world economic system - is an extremely significant phenomenon. But the answer to the following question is important: is territorial expansion and the accompanying change in price proportions a natural way for the development of the existing world economic system or a manifestation of some new deep processes that change the very paradigm of economic development?
When they talk about the economic revolution, it is not about a change in the technological structure and/or another technological (industrial) revolution, the consequences of which are major structural shifts in the economy, changes in price proportions and the emergence of new markets, but about a change in the paradigm of economic development - the economic revolution, comparable in importance to the Neolithic (transition from an appropriating to a reproductive type of management) and industrial (transition from a predominantly agricultural economy to factory production) revolutions.
The use of the term "economic revolution" does not speak of the spasmodic nature of the changes (which in all three cases are cumulative in the gradual transition of quantity into quality), but of their radical nature - the formation of a new model of the economic structure of society. In this sense, economic revolutions differ significantly from political revolutions, during which first there is a sharp change in the conditions of life (the social paradigm of development), and then a partial restoration of the past begins.
To substantiate the thesis about the formation of a new paradigm of economic development, it is necessary to study the fundamental changes associated with economic revolutions, to which the following can be attributed: a change in the nature of the division of labor, a change in the way economic entities interact, and a change in the basis of economic power.
Change in the nature of the division of labor. The change in the paradigm of economic development is characterized, first of all, by a change in the nature of the division of labor. So, the first (Neolithic) economic revolution is associated with the formation of stable areas of division of labor - the division of the community into those who are constantly engaged in valiant activities (cattle breeding, hunting, war), and those who are engaged in low-prestige work in the household, including agriculture .
The second (industrial) revolution is characterized not only by the transition from manual labor to machine labor, the formation of industry as an independent sphere of production and the redistribution of most of the created social wealth into it. Simultaneously, there is a massive separation of production (enterprises) from households. A predominantly subsistence economy, in which the economy includes the institution of exchange (market), but most of the products are produced to meet their own needs (including the need for luxury ), gives way to a market economy, where goods are produced mainly for exchange, and profit-making becomes the target function of economic organizations.
Finally, the third (digital) revolution marks the separation of organizational and intellectual centers from production and service departments, the localization of individual components of the production process in different parts of the world - another great unbundling .
The change in the nature of the division of labor that is taking place before our eyes is distinguished by such features as:
- redistribution of most of the social wealth created in the sphere of intellectual and organizational activities (generation and commercialization of ideas, control over value chains);
- expanding the scale of remote interaction, which allows not only coordination and cooperation of geographically distributed participants, but also remote control of robotic systems;
- customization and return of the production of a significant part of consumer goods and services to the household through the improvement of household appliances; in the future, this trend is likely to increase: 3D printers will allow households to produce many goods on their own;
- gradual replacement by computers and robots of specialists in many professions, including those requiring high qualifications: training, health diagnostics, surgical operations, control of complex technical devices and, as a result, increased differentiation of the nature of work;
- displacement of human labor by robots due to computerization and automation of the vast majority of operations, including those related to decision-making. As a result, if the institutional conditions of employment do not change, there may be an increase in unemployment and the problem of "surplus population".
Change in the way of economic interaction - forms of building relationships between business entities and ways of coordinating their activities.
The industrial revolution, as noted, was accompanied by a transition to the market as the main means of coordinating economic (intercompany) interaction. K. Polanyi believed that the pre-industrial economy included the institution of market exchange, but was not controlled by the market . To describe the pre-industrial economy, he introduces such types of transactions as transactions of reciprocity, redistribution, housekeeping and exchange.
The market way of coordinating economic activity assumes that the interaction of economic agents is regulated by the mechanism of free pricing - the balance of supply and demand based on the competition of independent sellers and buyers seeking to maximize their own benefit (in this sense, it is more correct to use the term "price method of coordination"). However, even in market-type economies, price regulation is by no means the only way to coordinate economic interaction. Almost always and everywhere it is supplemented by standardization (in the form of both formal norms and routines and traditions), administrative regulation (in particular, in the form of redistribution transactions) and mutual agreement (for example, in the form of reciprocity transactions) .
If we talk about economies of the pre-industrial type, we also find a combination of several ways of coordinating economic interaction. At the same time, in communal-type economies, transactions of reciprocity and their inherent mechanism of mutual agreement (consultative coordination) prevail, and in hierarchical-type economies, which include not only feudal, but also planned economy, - redistribution transactions and the administrative method of coordination prevail.
The question arises: if the transition from an agrarian type of economy to an industrial one was accompanied by a transition to the market as the leading way of coordinating economic interaction, then what way of coordinating economic interaction can claim to be the leading one in the digital economy?
Apparently, we are talking about network forms of economic interaction, which are based on the formation of stable ties between economic entities based on the constant exchange of information and building relationships of trust. Just as the market is born in the depths of pre-industrial economies, network forms of economic interaction are born in the depths of the industrial economy.
Here we are talking about a return to a communal form of government based on expanding the possibilities of information exchange . In other words, the development of ICT makes it possible to solve the problem of the direct exchange of information, and, consequently, the establishment of direct links and relationships of trust between a very wide range of people. Today there is a gradual displacement of the market as a universal way of inter-company interaction of independent producers by network forms of cooperation, within which the leading method of coordination is mutual agreement.
It should be emphasized that network forms replace predominantly market rather than intra-company interaction, since the weakening of the problem of information asymmetry gives rise to opportunities not only for the formation of stable inter-company relations, but also for the consolidation of corporations, as well as for strengthening the intra-corporate vertical of power .
Change in the basis of economic power. Usually, when analyzing various socio-economic formations (modes of production), researchers focus on what is for them the main factor of production (the main object of ownership). According to popular belief, under feudalism (agrarian economy) this factor is land (natural resources), under capitalism (industrial economy) - the means of production (capital), and in the new economy - knowledge (information).
In our opinion, this approach somewhat simplifies the problem of economic power, reducing it to the problem of property. This formulation of the problem seems to be explained by the temptation to study past and future institutions on the basis of today's analogies. This is most clearly manifested in relation to the broad interpretation of the concept of "property".
Describing the modern economy, we also expand the understanding of the category of "property", identifying it, in fact, with the possibility of restricting the rights of others. Meanwhile, in today's economy, power relations are not always based on property relations. Even if we are talking about the power to dispose of resources or the power to regulate access to a resource, including electronic (Skype, Torrent), we are faced with complex phenomena, for the study of which it is necessary to distinguish between operational rules and rules of collective choice , and also take into account the possibility of dispersal of individual ownership rights . But the most important thing is that the power to dispose of resources, which is usually called power-property, is far from the only basis of economic power. No less important is the power of status, which can be based on estate privileges, official position, clan (family) hierarchy, tradition, etc.
Another basis of economic power is monopoly. Power-monopoly is based on the inequality of the negotiating power of the parties due to the limited space of choice... This provision can be due to both control over a unique resource, including intellectual property, infrastructure facilities (pipeline, the only road); access to the market, as well as a unique place in a particular value chain . In other words, a monopoly can be conditioned both by the ability to regulate access to a resource, including an intangible one (and in this case, some analogy with the rights and rules characteristic of property relations is appropriate), and by locking the counterparty in a certain system of relations. The best illustration of the second type of monopoly is a fundamental transformation , when the negotiating power of the parties changes as a result of one of the counterparties investing in specific assets, and power is transferred not to the owner of these assets, but to its counterparty.
The next important source of power can be called economic coercion - power-temptation . It is beneficial for suppliers to cooperate with large retailers, as such cooperation enables them to realize economies of scale and drastically reduce transaction costs. Even though, you have to pay for this by agreeing to dictate the terms of interaction on the part of the counterparty (prices, delivery times, product quality, packaging).Taxi drivers who work with platforms like Uber or industrial companies that supply components to Boeing are in a similar situation. In all cases, we are not talking about the monopoly of one of the parties to the transaction, but on its position in the hierarchy of its market field . In other words, if power-monopoly is based on the limitation of the space of the current choice, then power-temptation is based on the current profitability of cooperation. Satellite companies focused on maximizing current benefits (minimizing current losses) voluntarily agree to a dependent position in the value chain, exchanging their freedom not only for today's subordinate position, but also for limiting the space of future choice .
It should be noted that in real life the power of one subject over others is almost always based on several grounds. However, we can also talk about the dominant basis of economic power, characteristic of each paradigm of economic development. In our opinion, in an agrarian society, economic power was based mainly on status (position in the class hierarchy), in industrial society - on property (in its classical sense), and in digital society - on economic coercion (position in the hierarchy of the market field and/or the value networks).
Thus, the analysis carried out indicates the inevitability of the digital transformation of social production and, as a result, a fundamental change in socio-economic relations. This is not just about another industrial or technological revolution (a change in the technological order), but about a change in the paradigm of economic development, comparable in importance to the Neolithic and industrial revolutions. The change in the paradigm of economic development is most clearly manifested in three areas: a change in the nature of the division of labor, a change in the leading mode of interaction between economic entities, and a change in the basis of economic power. The change in the nature of the division of labor is expressed primarily in the separation of intellectual and organizational centers from production and service units. Gradually, an increasing part of the social wealth created will move into the sphere of innovation. The free market as the leading mode of inter-firm interaction is likely to be replaced by relatively stable value networks, both in terms of the composition of participants and the internal structure. Finally, property in its classical sense will cease to be the main basis of economic power. Its place will be taken by a position in the hierarchy of the field of interaction (firm, market, network), which makes it possible to establish rules for interaction and distribution of added value.
1.2. Methodological issues of interpretation of the term "digital economy".
The digital economy is a new socio-economic phenomenon that is developing at a rapid pace - so fast that economic theory lags far behind in studying this phenomenon. Currently, the term "digital economy" theorists and practitioners understand completely different phenomena and processes.
The term "digital economy" appeared in the scientific literature not so long ago, at the end of the XX century, and became widespread. For the search query "digital economy", Google produces more than 600 thousand results. This is quite natural, because digital technologies in the 21st century are rapidly developing and have a major impact not only on the economy, but also on the development of society. Interest in the digital economy is shown not only by scientists, but also by such authoritative organizations as the World Bank, which published the results of several of its own studies on this topic, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which, since 2002, has regularly distributed scientific and methodological materials on the digital economy , European Parliament, International Monetary Fund and other governmental and intergovernmental organizations. In the Russian Federation, the digital economy is being translated into practice in the form of a national program.
However, despite such activity in the field of digital economy research, there are a number of unresolved theoretical and practical problems. The first is the lack of a generally accepted definition of the digital economy. It is difficult to find another branch of economics in which there would be so many different definitions of the term. It can be said without exaggeration that almost every researcher of this topic gives his own definition of this concept. This is evidence of insufficient methodological study of the issue of the essence of the digital economy.
The term "digital economy" itself is new and unsettled. Dozens of definitions can be found in the economic literature. It makes no sense to dwell on the analysis of all these definitions. This issue is well elaborated on in both in Russian , and in English literature. However, we consider it necessary to dwell on the methodological side of the issue of defining the digital economy.
Considering the many definitions of the digital economy, two methodological approaches can be distinguished. The first one (of course, the dominant one in the economic literature) is that one or another part of the economy is recognized as a digital economy. The allocation of this part is most often carried out according to the criteria for belonging to certain industries or types of economic activity. The second approach, which is extremely rare, is to recognize the digital economy as a special kind of economy as a whole, regardless of sectoral affiliation, while the definition of the economy as digital is sometimes seen as a new stage in the development of the economy . Another definition has become quite widespread, which cannot be directly attributed to either the first or the second approach. In this definition, digital refers to an economy based on digital technologies. Since the concept of digital technologies, as a rule, is not disclosed, the position of the authors using this definition becomes clear not from the definition, but from the context of the article or study.
Let's consider the definition of the digital economy as part of the modern economy. This direction arose among practicing economists and is actively supported by government agencies.
At the beginning of the XXI century, it became quite obvious that the economy is undergoing revolutionary changes under the influence of the rapid spread of various digital technologies. Naturally, economists were faced with the task of determining the contribution of the digital economy to overall economic development, the share of the digital economy in the economies of different countries, and the dynamics of the development of the digital economy itself. Similar tasks have arisen for government agencies: to promote the development of the national digital economy, develop support programs and apply incentive measures. Naturally, for these purposes, the ideas of separating the digital economy from the entire economy according to some complex criteria are not suitable. Calculations of the contribution of the digital economy to economic development in this situation become impossible. Analysis can only be carried out when statistical data are available. Such data is readily available in the sectoral context, which is why there is a separation of several industries from the economy, which are called the "digital economy". In this case, dynamics, share, contribution and many other indicators are easily calculated. But there has been heated debate over which industries should be classified as part of the digital economy. Various researchers attribute the following to the digital economy: the Internet, digital multimedia, robotics, cloud computing and big data analysis, non-cash financial transactions using the Internet, network effects, online platforms, information and telecommunication technologies, online commerce, the Internet of things, etc.
This approach to the definition of the digital economy has the right to exist, but the definition itself should be expressed more clearly. It is known that definitions can be of two main types: extensional and intensional. The former are formed by enumerating the objects described by a certain term (in this case, the term "digital economy"). There are two words in this term: "economy", which indicates a generic trait, and "digital", which indicates a specific trait.
A specific trait must clearly distinguish this object from other objects belonging to this genus. A specific trait can be specified by enumeration of objects that are combined by definition. For example, we can give the following definition: the digital economy is an economy that includes two industries: the Internet and information and telecommunication systems. By the way, based on the analysis of the content of digital economy research, this definition can be considered the most common. However, in this case, two problems arise.
First problem. Since we are not talking about the entire economy, but only about its part, it would be logical to use the term "digital sector of the economy". Recently, this problem has begun to attract the attention of economists. Thus, a study by the International Monetary Fund distinguishes between the digital economy and the digital sector of the economy .
The second problem of this direction is that there is a need to justify the list of industries related to the concept of "digital economy". Almost all researchers adhering to this approach include information and telecommunication technologies (ICT) and the Internet in the list of industries. But robotics is very rarely included in the list. Why? What criteria are used to select industries that are included in the digital economy?
There are practically no such studies, although some economists paid attention to this problem for a long time. So, R. Atkinson and A. McKay noted that in 2006, 70% of microprocessors were not connected to the Internet, but were used offline , while the digital economy usually comes down to the Internet. A dilemma arises: either microprocessors do not belong to the digital economy, or industries in which microprocessors are used massively should be included in the digital economy. By what criterion do most economists do not attribute a digital camera, in which there are many sensors and microprocessors, to the digital economy?
Faced with these problems, individual researchers try to get around them or move away from the sectoral approach. A number of researchers believe that the digital economy is a part of the total production generated by various "digital" resources. These resources include digital skills, digital equipment (hardware, software and communications) and intermediate digital goods and services used in production. 13 industries are identified and analyzed using statistical data from 11 countries .
Other researchers, such as reputable scientists in the field of digital economy R. Bukht and R. Hicks, have proposed their own version of the definition of the digital economy. As a basis, they used the study by S. Brenen and D. Kreis "Digitization and digitalization" , which distinguishes between these concepts. On this basis, R. Bukht and R. Hicks build a three-level model of the digital economy :
- first level: the digital sector, which includes telecommunications, software, IT consulting, computer technology, etc.;
- second level: digital economy, which includes the digital sector, as well as platform solutions, digital services, etc.;
- third level: digitalized economy, which includes the digital economy, as well as network business, e-commerce, etc.
As a result, the authors give the following definition: the digital economy - is the part of the total output that is wholly or mainly produced on the basis of digital technologies by firms whose business model is based on digital products or services. This definition is rather vague, but it is flexible enough to take into account the development of digital technologies and digital business in the future . The last remark is important for the authors, since, in their opinion, the essence of the problem lies not so much in the fuzziness [of the definitions of the digital economy - O.T.], but in the scale of the phenomenon: as more and more service providers, manufacturers of finished products, and even suppliers of raw materials are using ICT in their activities, the digital economy in the current definitions becomes just "economy" .The last phrase quite clearly expresses the peculiarity of the position of not only these authors, but in general the entire first approach to the definition of the digital economy. In the term "digital economy" in the understanding of researchers who support the methodological first approach, the key word is "digital", and the word "economy" is of secondary importance. In terms of R. Bukht and R. Hicks, the digital economy may someday become just an economy (which means that it is not an economy today). But if the digital economy is not an economy, does it make sense to call it that?
Thus, we can conclude that the methodological disadvantage of the first approach is the incorrect establishment of generic and specific characteristics in the definition of "digital economy". The word "economy" should not be a specific element, as is often practiced when using the first approach, but a generic one. The digital economy is, first of all - an economy. But these two expressions are not identical: in addition to the digital one, there is another, non-digital economy. This is recognized by almost all researchers of the digital economy, but the term "traditional economy" is more often used. It seems to us that the term "non-digital economy" is more accurate, since some criteria will be required to separate the digital economy from the non-digital, and perhaps others to separate the traditional from the non-traditional.
Consider the second methodological approach. It is based on the recognition of the word "economy" as a generic element in the expression "digital economy". The word "digital" in this case is a specific element. That is, the digital economy is an economy, but of a special kind (there is also a non-digital economy). The digital economy can be part of the economy as a whole. However, in this case, we recommend using the term "digital sector of the economy". This is done so that the term "digital economy" does not denote two different phenomena: the digital economy as part of the economy and the digital economy as a whole as a certain characteristic or a new stage in the development of the economy. However, in any case, it is necessary to separate the digital economy from the non-digital. This is understood by many researchers, while noting the complexity of this action.
When considering the digital and non-digital economy, we proceed, firstly, from the recognition of the economy as a generic element in the expression "digital economy", and secondly, from the fact that there should be a criterion by which one type of economy (digital) can be unambiguously separated from another type of economy (non-digital).
For all definitions of the digital economy, this criterion is the main methodological problem. Most researchers simply bypass this problem. To find a criterion for distinguishing the digital economy from non-digital, it is advisable to start with the concept of "economy". Note that the term "economy" also has many definitions. We use one of the most common definitions, according to which the economy - is "the economic activity of society, as well as the totality of relations that develop in the system of production, distribution, exchange and consumption" .
In the vast majority of cases, when distinguishing the digital economy from the entire economy, researchers analyze the "totality of relations of production" from the above definition. As a result, there are as many researchers as there are positions on the issue of the digital economy. This seems to indicate a dead end in the analysis. We believe that to highlight the digital economy, the key element in the above definition is not production, but activity. It is necessary to find such characteristics in activities that will clearly separate the digital economy from other types.
Activity, including economic activity, - is the process of purposeful influence of the subject on the real world (object) to meet the needs of the subject. The purposefulness of the impact, in turn, means that the subject of economic activity has a certain purpose. A goal is an ideal image of the end result of an activity. The end result is concrete, and its ideal image is naturally abstract. In other words, the goal is a model of the end result .
Models can be divided into three groups according to the way they represent reality :
- empirical (other names: heuristic, ideal, imaginary, speculative, iconic, etc.);
- natural (analogue, physical, material, etc.);
- mathematical (digital).
Depending on the type of model used in the goal-setting activities of people, the economy can be classified as digital or non-digital.
An analysis of the ways in which the subject influences the objects and means of labor allows us to distinguish three types of economic activity that form the basis of three types of economy :
1. Empirical economics, which is based on the impact of the subject of production on the objects of labor using tools. The target orientation of activities is based on empirical models.
2. Analog economy, which is based on the management of the subject of production by the means of labor, and those, in turn, perform operations with the objects of labor. The target orientation of activity in this case is based on analog models.
3. The digital economy, which is based on the impact of the subject of production on the management systems of labor means. The target orientation of activity is based on mathematical models.
This classification is based on the criterion: the way the subject of production influences the means and objects of labor. Each of these methods has its own form of goal-setting in the implementation of production activities.
The first two types of economy are not digital. The third type is digital. However, this type has specific features that are not characteristic of the first two. The digital economy assumes that labor management systems have been developed and created. This means that various sensors, processors and other digital devices are selected and combined with specially created software. But such software still needs to be created, and this is a completely different type of economic activity that does not fit into the definition of the third type of economy. Digital (mathematical) models are the result of this type of activity, and the target orientation itself exists in a conceivable form, similar to the empirical one, which is inherent in the first type. But it is fundamentally different from the empirical one. The empirical model is based on experience. In this case, the idea of the future result is based primarily not on experience, but on knowledge. Therefore, it is advisable to call such a target activity model heuristic, while understanding that it generally belongs to the same class as empirical models.
Summing up, we can say that the digital economy is a complex phenomenon that includes two interrelated processes: the process of creating digital systems for managing labor tools and the process of using digital management systems in production activities. It is important to note that the two named processes impose completely different requirements on the qualifications of subjects of labor activity. The development of control systems requires highly qualified developers: scientists, engineers, designers, programmers. This is creative intellectual work. Moreover, the more complex the control system being created, the higher the requirements for the qualifications and level of knowledge of developers. On the contrary, the process of using labor means management systems in production activities practically does not require qualifications and any special knowledge. An employee of such a mass profession as a cashier-seller in modern stores does not even need to know the multiplication table. Cash register management systems allow you to work effectively even without such knowledge. The more perfect the management system, the lower the requirements for the qualifications of people who use these systems.
Thus, it should be noted that at the present stage of economic development, the functions and role of the subject of production and management are fundamentally changing. In the transition from the use of empirical models to analog models, changes in the means of labor played a key role. The emergence of specialized equipment, mechanical and electrical energy sources required changes in the activities of production entities. Empirical models are not suitable for specialized equipment, they are replaced by analog models. Modern changes have affected not so much the means of labor themselves, but the processes of managing them. And this is the function of the subject of production. Many functions previously performed by a person are beginning to be carried out automatically, using sensors, processors and software. Analog models are not suitable for such production, they are replaced by mathematical (digital) models. Of course, the subject of economic activity cannot disappear completely, but it leaves the given production process and is located somewhere else. In any case, there is an owner who makes decisions independently. But in the production process, the subject may disappear or its functions will fundamentally change.
The classification of the economy according to the criterion of the variant of the impact of the subject of production activity on the objects and means of labor is one of the many ways to classify the economy. Such a plurality of classifications is inherent in all objects.
Based on the foregoing, we can draw the following conclusion: it is inappropriate to divide the economy into two parts - digital and non-digital - according to industry criteria. The digital economy, to a greater or lesser extent, has penetrated all sectors of the economy.
The digital economy - is the economic activity of people, a feature of which is the impact of a person as a subject of production not on the objects of labor and means of labor, but on the management systems of means of labor. The non-digital economy is characterized by human impact on the objects or means of labor.
The digital sector of the economy - is, firstly, production, in which a person influences the management systems of the means of labor, and secondly, the development and design of new systems for managing the means of production. Accordingly, the digital sector of the economy is based in its goal-setting activities, firstly, on digital (mathematical) models, and secondly, on heuristic models of the result of economic activity. The term "digital sector of the economy" should be used to analyze the impact of the digital economy on specific socio-economic processes in modern society. The term "digital economy" is more suitable for a general description of the current stage of economic development .
Naturally, there is no clear boundary between the digital and pre-digital economy. Similarly, even in the era of post-capitalism, elements of a subsistence economy remain in the economy. However, despite all the conventions, the countries of the world can be divided into three groups depending on the level of development of the digital economy. The first group of countries creates digital production and management systems and uses them in economic activities. This group includes the USA, Japan, Germany, South Korea, China. These five countries account for 74% of the total number of robots in the world . Many countries that are called developed can also be classified in this group with some reservations. The second group includes countries that do not directly participate in the development of digital production and management systems, but actively buy them and use them in the economy: the Czech Republic, Turkey, Mexico, Brazil, India. And, finally, the third group is countries that do not develop digital production and management systems, and do not use them in the economy. This group includes not only the poorest countries in the world, but also some fairly rich oil-producing countries. Russia, at this point in time, is also one of them. In 2018, 1007 industrial robots functioned in the Russian economy, of which 860 were installed in 2018. Only 4% of them were produced in Russia . The number of robots in Russia is 5 per 10,000 employees, which is significantly lower than the world average (99 robots), not to mention countries like Singapore, where there are 831 robots per 10 000 employees .
The analysis carried out allows us to make a forecast about the next stage of economic development. This stage will be based on artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence will be increasingly used in the process of creating new technologies, products or services. It will be a serious competitor to those who are creating the digital economy today: scientists, designers, programmers. But in any case, artificial intelligence will not force a person out of the economy, only a person is capable of goal setting. One can imagine a programmer robot endowed with artificial intelligence or a manager robot, but an owner robot cannot be imagined. The purpose of economic activity will always be set by a person.
Thus, the question of the definition of "digital economy" is theoretical. But it also has important practical significance, primarily for the development of state policy in the field of the digital economy.
A narrow understanding of the digital economy as several industries related to the Internet and information and telecommunication systems allows us to see the development of these industries, but does not allow us to determine their contribution to economic development. These industries are for the most part tools that can be used to ensure a higher rate of development of the entire economy. However, the presence of a tool does not mean that the tool is being used effectively. One can even imagine a situation where a lot of money has been spent on the development of these tools, but they are not used actively enough. In this case, the development of high technologies will lead to a decrease in the efficiency of the economy, and not to an increase. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the development of the economy as a whole and then determine what contribution the digital economy has made. On this basis, a state policy to stimulate the digital economy can be built.
A good example for studying the importance of the digital economy is China, which has been actively developing in this direction in recent decades. Two or three decades ago, no one would have called the labor force in China educated and skilled, especially in rural areas. However, China's economic policy has led to a huge shift of workers from agriculture to industry. And these poorly educated and low-skilled workers began to produce Apple computers. Not because their qualifications have increased dramatically, but because modern equipment based on digital technologies does not contain requirements for high qualifications. And China is very actively using modern digital equipment. And if earlier it was mainly imported equipment, now China has become one of the largest manufacturers of industrial robots and other modern digital equipment. Moreover, China seeks to enter a narrow circle of countries - developers of digital systems. To do this, it was necessary to significantly raise the level of education, which is necessary for the development of modern management systems. Thus, according to the authoritative source The World University Rankings in 2019, 5 Chinese universities entered the top 100 best universities, with Tsinghua University taking the honorable 22-nd place. Another 5 universities are located in the second hundred. Unfortunately, there are no Russian educational institutions in the first hundred of the best universities in the world, and only one closes the second hundred. This is the best Russian university - MSU, which is in 199th place .
The Russian government has high hopes for a change in the situation as a result of the implementation of the national program "Digital economy of the Russian Federation". How justified are these expectations? Of course, the program will give a certain impetus to the development of the digital economy, but not in all areas. Such a conclusion can be drawn from the analysis of the target indicators of the national program. Target indicators are grouped into three blocks.
The first block determines the need to increase the cost of developing the digital economy in the Russian Federation. In 2017, due to all sources, this indicator was 1.7% of the gross domestic product of Russia, in 2024 it should be 5.1%. Of greater interest would be the indicator of the contribution of the digital economy to the formation of gross domestic product.
The second block of targets includes information on the development of information and telecommunications infrastructure for high-speed data transmission, for example, "an increase in the proportion of households with broadband Internet access" from 72.6% in 2017 to 97% in 2024.
The third block grouped indicators denoting an increase in the share of domestic software in state and municipal authorities, as well as in state corporations and companies with state participation.
As can be seen from the target indicators, the main emphasis in the program is on the development of information and telecommunication technologies (the Internet in particular) and the creation of domestic software. Almost 50% of the funds provided by the program are planned to be directed to "creating a global competitive infrastructure for the transmission, processing and storage of data mainly based on domestic developments". It is planned to allocate about 27% of the funds provided by the program for the creation of Russian software.
At the same time, there are no plans to allocate funds for the creation and use of digital technologies in industry and the service sector. Many economists draw attention to this. Commenting on the "Digital Economy" program, they note that "the problems of digitalization of industries and the introduction of advanced production technologies have practically remained out of sight of developers" . It seems that this problem is the most serious shortcoming of the national program. These problematic moments are due, among other things, to the fact that the developers of the national program present the digital economy as part of the economy, consisting of two industries: information and communication technologies and the IT industry. In our opinion, the digital economy is a much more complex phenomenon.
1.3. Digital economy and digital products: typology in system economics.
The digital economy is part of the real economy, its digital sector based on the use of digital technologies. Accordingly, we will conditionally divide the products produced by the traditional and digital economy into traditional and digital (electronic). The views of researchers on the main components of the digital economy diverge. For example, in the paper three components of the digital economy are highlighted: the infrastructure required to support e-commerce business processes; business-processes carried out with the help of computer networks, and transactions, which are understood as an agreement on the transfer of rights to use goods or services, reached between the seller and the buyer through computer networks. A more modern approach is offered by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the US Department of Commerce. According to this approach, the digital economy is also defined on the basis of three parts : infrastructure that provides the opportunity to use digital technologies; electronic transactions - transactions for the sale or purchase of goods through computer networks and digital content created by users on the Internet.
Initially, the digital economy was interpreted exclusively as the internet economy - an economic activity that allows to create added value through the implementation of projects on the Internet , but gradually this understanding has expanded and deepened. In later works , the focus of researchers' attention has shifted to digitalization processes, i.e. changes caused by the use of digital technologies in the economy.
Another view of the digital economy is proposed in the report of the International Monetary Fund , where it is proposed not to define the broad concept of "digital economy", but to focus on the digital sector of the economy, consisting of the main producers of "digitalization": online platforms; sharing platforms and crowdsourcing (crowdfunding, crowdinvesting); suppliers of information and communication goods and services. The report also notes that an alternative for defining the digital sector could be the definition of digital transactions . By "digital transaction" is meant a transaction that has at least one of the following characteristics: the product is ordered digitally, the product is delivered digitally, the product is accessed through an online platform. At the same time, any digital transaction can be described using three parameters, answering the questions "how?", "what?" and "who?": the nature of the transaction (determined by the signs presented above); product (goods, services, information) and actors (business, individuals, government). Note that a detailed review of the evolution of the concept of "digital economy" and its main components is presented in the work .
One way or another, regardless of the definition of the digital economy, which this or that researcher adheres to, the focus of its attention is on products produced using digital technologies. Even N. Negroponte in his work noted that the products of the new (digital) economy "consist of bits instead of atoms", which gives them advantages that are inaccessible to the products of the traditional (real) economy: these are virtuality, lack of weight, speed of movement. In the work , for example, the following characteristics are highlighted that distinguish the products of the digital economy from others: non-competitiveness, the possibility of infinite distribution, discreteness, lack of spatial belonging, artificiality of creation. The article explores the economic nature of the products of the digital economy by constructing a diagram of the interaction of technology, the economic characteristics of these products and consumer behavior. According to this scheme, only three types of digital economy products are distinguished: public (non-competitive, there are no restrictions on consumption), long-term use, and products whose usefulness cannot be determined in advance, until the moment of purchase. Another view is presented in the work , which proposes the allocation of three groups of digital products based on the characteristics of their production and consumption. The first group is formed by products that are developed exclusively in electronic form and do not have a material prototype (for example, software). The second group includes digital copies of real products that have a tangible form (for example, a digitized book). And, finally, the third group consists of digital images of real objects. At the same time, the main task of the digital image is to provide more efficient management of real world objects, and not to replace them in consumption processes (for example, online taxi ordering services through mobile applications, such as Yandex Taxi, Uber, etc.). Features of pricing products of the digital economy are disclosed in the work . The problems of the formation of psychological mechanisms and models of user confidence in the products of the digital economy are presented in the work .
When developing a typology of economic products, the methodological basis for researchers was system economic theory, or system economics - a new scientific direction formed on the basis of the system paradigm and combining the achievements of neoclassical, institutional and evolutionary economic theories. Unlike other concepts, the focus of system economic theory is on socio-economic systems, and the economy is considered as a field of their interaction.
System economic theory takes the results of the new theory of economic systems and applies them to the analysis of a wide class of economic formations and structures. A feature of this theory is the approach to the definition of a socio-economic system, according to which the system is distinguished in the surrounding world by an external observer on the basis of its inherent spatio-temporal coordinates (exogenous position), and not on the basis of its internal features and structure (endogenous position). Thus, the existence of only four basic types of socio-economic systems, fundamentally different in their nature and properties, is possible: object, environment, process and design.
The first type - object systems - are not limited in time, but are localized in space. The second type - environment systems - are not limited either in time or in space. The third type - process systems - are limited in time, but localized in space. And the last, fourth type - design systems - are localized both in time and in space.
Each of these types of economic systems performs a corresponding basic general economic function. Thus, the main function for object systems is production, for environment systems - consumption, for process systems - distribution, and for project systems - the exchange function. Due to the implementation of these functions and the exchange of resources of space and time, systems of four basic types are combined into stable ring-shaped structures of the form "object system - environment system - process system - project system - object system", called tetrads. A schematic representation of a tetrad is shown in fig. 1 .
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of a tetrad
The construction of tetrads is subject to the principle of fractality, thus, any socio-economic system, being a part of an "external" tetrad for itself, can also be represented as a tetrad - a whole consisting of four subsystems of various types. At the same time, depending on the specialization of the socio-economic system, the proportions of subsystems within it, and, as a result, the products that it produces will differ.
As shown in the work , each of the types of socio-economic systems produces a corresponding type of product. Object systems produce goods, environment systems provide services, process systems perform work, and project systems transform economic systems. So, for example, an industrial enterprise, in which the object subsystem prevails, produces goods that have a material expression. An operator (provider) providing communication services to subscribers has an increased environment subsystem. A construction company performs work on the repair of apartments, which is expressed in the predominance of the process subsystem. A consulting firm, in turn, carries out projects for the transformation (creation of new) economic systems, which naturally affects its project subsystem. Thus, a typical product of an object system is a product, an environment system - a service, a process system - work, and a project system - a purposeful transformation of the economic system itself.
As a rule, there are no problems with the definition of a product as an economic category, however, for an unambiguous understanding of a service, work, and a project for transforming the economic system, it is necessary to provide explanations. A service is an action, the results of which have no material expression and are consumed by the customer at the time of their receipt. In other words, the result of the service becomes useful only if the process of its provision is completed. If the service is not provided to the end, then the completed part of the service is not useful for the customer. As a product of an environment system, a service can also be viewed as a fact of connection and one-time (short-term) use of a technical infrastructure or professional environment, such as calling a mobile phone, accessing the Internet, getting a haircut at a hairdresser or consulting a lawyer. Work is a process, the results of which are material, and each part of this process is useful for the consumer. As an example, we can cite construction and installation works, repair and maintenance works, scientific or engineering developments, etc. The products of the activity of process systems, in our understanding, may also include services related to the movement (distribution) of some objects in space, which are not short-term. The transformation project is aimed at transforming the economic system, acquiring new qualities by this system. On the one hand, certain parts of the transformation project have no utility for the consumer, which distinguishes it from work, and on the other hand, the results of the transformation project are unique, for example, an appendectomy is a medical service, and sex reassignment surgery is a transformation project.
We also note that, unlike a product that can be manufactured, sent to a warehouse and sold in the future, a service, work, and transformation of the economic system cannot be done in advance, since they are customized products, i.e. are produced on the basis of the customer's request and must meet his individual requirements.
The development and application of digital technologies in production processes have not left the products manufactured by socio-economic systems unchanged, affecting their characteristics and properties. To identify the features of the products of the traditional and digital parts of the economy, we will consider the stages of their movement through the corresponding tetrad groupings.
A typical example of a tetrad is the combination of a factory, a distribution network, a transport (logistics) company and a shopping center, which ensures that a traditional product passes through the stages of movement from the manufacturer to the end consumer (see fig. 2) .
Thus, the company as an object system produces goods, which then enters the distribution network, which acts as an environment system. There is a consumption of goods by the distribution network. After that, with the help of a transport (logistics) company as a process system, the goods are distributed among shopping centers. The shopping center,
Fig. 2. Stages of movement of a traditional product from the manufacturer to the end consumer
in turn, is the place of the transaction (project), the buyer purchases the goods, the goods are exchanged for money.
Let's consider the stages of movement of a digital product, also tracing the chain from the manufacturer to the end consumer (see fig. 3) .
The manufacturer (author, publisher, music label, etc.) as an object system carries out production of a digital product - an independent digital object or a digital model (copy) of a traditional product. The produced digital product is placed on the manufacturer's website or added to the online store, its consumption is carried out by the Internet as an environment system. With the help of website search engine optimization (SEO) mechanisms as a process system, marketing and information and communication processes are launched, dissemination or distribution of information about a new digital product is carried out on social networks and other websites. Under the influence of these processes, a buyer is attracted to an online store, where a transaction (project) is carried out on the basis of a payment system, and the exchange of a digital product for money occurs.
Fig. 3. Stages of movement of a digital product from the manufacturer to the end consumer
In view of the fact that other types of products - service, work and the project of transformation of the economic system - are customized, of particular interest here is not the movement from the producer to the end consumer (as in the case of a product), but the sequence of their movement from the customer's request until the start of their production by the executor (see fig. 4) .
Since the stages of movement of the service, work and the project of transformation of the economic system within the tetrad will be the same, as an example, we will consider only one type of product - a service.
The customer as an object system makes a request containing the parameters of the service and directed to the information field - a set of information sources (newspapers, magazines, opinions, reviews, critique, etc.) that allow the customer to obtain information about the performers of the required service. The generated request is consumed (absorbed) by the information field as an environment system. Based on the information collected, the customer forms a market of performers and, using the mechanisms of "manual" selection as a process system, selects the performer who made the best offer. There is a definition of the final executor, the distribution of the request. At the last step, the executor confirms the performance of the service or exchanges the initial request of the executor for his consent, which is fixed by an oral agreement (contract) as a project system. After that, the direct performance of the service by the executor begins, which is already associated with another tetrad of economic systems.
Fig. 4. The stages of the movement of a traditional service, the work and the project of transformation of the economic system from the request of the customer to the moment the executor starts their production.
In a similar way, we will consider the stages of the movement of a service provided with the help of digital technologies, from the request of the customer to the moment the executor starts production (see fig. 5) .
Fig. 5. The stages of the movement of a digital service, the work and the project of transformation of the economic system from the request of the customer to the moment the executor starts their production.
The customer, as an object system, makes a request, which, unlike a traditional service, is directed to an online platform (exchange, site) and has an electronic form, i.e. the request is made using the Internet, a mobile application or other similar means. The online platform as an environment system consumes this request, its card or page is created. Based on the mechanisms built into the online platform as a process system, a market of performers is automatically created, who come up with specific proposals to fulfill the customer's request. A more advanced option is a fully automated selection of performers, carried out by algorithms built into the online platform. Then, from the executors presented by the online platform, the customer selects the most suitable one, based on qualifications, experience, and the proposed cost of providing the service. The request is distributed to the executor. In turn, the executor must confirm the fact of receiving the order, as well as for a traditional service, exchange the request for his consent. At the same time, internal mechanisms of the online platform (project system) are used to complete the transaction, which reserves the control of the quality and timing of the service. Then, as in the previous case, the performer proceeds to provide the service.
Despite the fact that the goods of the traditional and digital sectors of the economy go through the same stages in the course of their movement, the physical properties and features of their movement in space have significant differences. The goods of the traditional part of the economy are made from raw materials, have size and mass characteristics, and are available to the perception of the consumer through the five main senses. As a result, the cycle of movement of goods, as a rule, takes a long time, since the transition from one stage to another requires the actual movement (transportation) of goods in space. In most cases, a digital product is a digital model of a real object , is the result of intellectual labor, has no material expression (virtual) and is available exclusively for visual and auditory perception by the consumer, since there is no physical transportation of a digital product in space, only information about it is distributed (less often - an introductory fragment). At the exchange stage, a new digital copy of the product is created on the consumer's computer or other device with virtually zero costs. Thus, the cycle of movement of a digital product from stage to stage can be conditionally instantaneous.
If, when paying for a traditional product at the exchange stage, the buyer has a choice - to make a cashless payment or transfer banknotes to the seller, then the buyer of a digital product has no such choice, since there is no physical meeting between the seller and the buyer. Therefore, cashless payment is the only possible way to pay for a digital product. Another important difference is the difference in the production costs of goods in the traditional and digital economy, which is reflected in their price accordingly. Unlike the goods of the traditional economy, the costs of producing a digital product do not include the cost of raw materials. Moreover, the re-production of a product of the traditional part of the economy requires the same costs for the production of each of its units, while the creation of a copy of a digital product requires minimal (tending to zero) costs. It follows that the price of a digital product will be lower than the price of its real prototype, and the profitability of producing each new copy will be higher. Comparative characteristics of traditional and digital goods are presented in table 1 .
Table 1
Comparative characteristics of traditional and digital goods
№ Characteristic Traditional goods Digital goods
1. Physical properties Real, has size and weight Virtual, has no size and weight
2. Perception by the consumer Tactile, visual, auditory, gustatory and olfactory Visual and auditory
3. Prime cost Includes raw materials Includes intellectual work
4. Goods movement cycle Long Conditionally instant
5. Payment method Cash and non-cash Only non-cash
6. Re-production of each new unit The costs are the same for every new unit Costs for each new unit tend to zero
In the case of traditional services (works, transformations of economic systems), the formation of an information field, communication with potential executors and execution of transaction documentation in the traditional economy takes more time than using the built-in functionality of an online platform that allows you to go through these stages faster in the digital economy. So, for example, in the traditional economy, transaction documentation is drawn up manually, while in the digital economy it is generated automatically based on the data entered by the user.
If a real business has a set working time and lunch breaks, you can make a request on the Internet around the clock, and the executor will respond to it immediately after reception and processing. The mechanisms of online platforms simplify the connection between the customer and the executor, regardless of the form (traditional or digital) of the service (work, transformation of the economic system). For example, when calling a taxi through a mobile application in electronic form, a driver is selected, to whom data about the trip is transmitted, and after that the actual provision of the transportation service in the real world is carried out.
When comparing traditional and digital services (works, transformations of economic systems), the same results are obtained as when comparing traditional and digital goods, with the exception of the last characteristic (№ 6 in the table - "re-production of each new unit"), since services (works, projects of transformations of economic systems) are customized. At the same time, characteristic № 4 - "product movement cycle" - changes to the characteristic "speed of service provision (performance of work, project implementation)". Let's give some examples. Information service - submission and publication of an advertisement in a newspaper and placement of an advertisement on a profile site on the Internet. Repair and maintenance work - repair of a machine mechanism at the factory and optimization of the procedure in the corporate information system. Implementation of projects - building a house and creating a three-dimensional model (visual three-dimensional image) of a house. Thus, the main difference between traditional and digital products is that they are produced in different spaces.
The comparative analysis of traditional and digital products, carried out above, can be subjected to reasonable criticism. In particular, any digital product has a volume expressed in units of measurement of the amount of information (in bytes) and takes up some space on the hard drive of a personal computer or server. Therefore, it is possible to calculate the costs of its storage, expressed in terms of the corresponding energy consumption, even though they will be extremely small. However, in real space, a digital product will not have physical weight and size.
As noted in a World Bank report ,the application of digital technologies promotes innovation and provides countries with the opportunity to receive "digital dividends" in the form of faster economic growth, expanding business opportunities and improving the quality of life and services provided to the population. But at the same time, the "digital divide" remains, associated primarily with the inaccessibility of the Internet for almost 60% of the world's population. For this reason, "digital dividends" are distributed unevenly, and it is necessary not only to carry out work to spread the possibilities of access to the Internet, but also to improve its analogous additions - the legal framework, user skills and institutions. There are three main groups of risks associated with analog additions, which the authors of the report highlight: the relationship between technology and regulation - there is a risk of natural monopolies in the market, therefore, it is necessary to create a business climate in which traditional firms and Internet companies can compete on an equal footing; competition between technology and skills - skills should contribute to the use of the potential of technology and the growth of labor productivity, otherwise, if such skills are lacking, people will have to compete with other people for less skilled jobs; the gap between technology and institutions - digital technologies, instead of empowering citizens, can become another means of control over them by the state.
The advantages of digital technologies - the increase in the availability and speed of information movement - is also a threat to cyber security. Here it is appropriate to recall the activities of the WikiLeaks company, which releases secret information obtained as a result of leaks or from anonymous sources, and the Streisand effect, according to which an attempt to remove information from wide access (on the Internet) leads to its even greater distribution.
Based on a comparison of the stages of movement of products in the traditional and digital parts of the economy, an analysis of the properties of these products and the features of their movement from the manufacturer to the end consumer (from the customer's request to the moment the production is started), results were obtained that allow us to draw a number of conclusions regarding the digital economy as a whole :
1) For the sphere of economic theory. The digital economy can be viewed as a kind of "shadow" of the real economy. With the current structure of production, the share of the digital economy in the country's gross domestic product will not exceed the share of the real economy. Consequently, the digital economy has limits to its growth.
2) For the sphere of economic policy. No one can satisfy their basic needs only with the help of digital products, for this reason it is impossible to separate the digital economy from the real. This circumstance must be taken into account when developing the country's economic policy and timely provision of measures for the development of both the digital and real economy.
3) For the sphere of economic management. The digital economy can be considered as a means of enhancing economic growth only in a system with a real economy. However, if a significant part of the gross value added is produced by the digital economy, a threat to the economic security of the country may arise .
4) For the sphere of economic practice. The release of digital products along with traditional products will allow companies to enter new market segments and increase business margins.
Thus, in general, for the first chapter, as conclusions, it can be noted that most authors and experts consider the digital economy in two aspects. From the point of view of an extended interpretation, the term refers to a part of the socio-economic relations that are associated with the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of information technologies. First of all, these are modern trends conditioned by so-called fourth industrial revolution. The second, "classical" interpretation considers the digital economy as a special type of economic activity, which is based on new methods of processing, storing and transmitting data. This includes electronic goods and services, as well as the entire spectrum of online business. It should be noted that as new technologies emerge and develop, the list and composition of the digital economy will be supplemented, therefore, approaches to the definition of the term, in our opinion, will change.
